One of the horror genre's "most widely read critics" (Rue Morgue # 68), "an accomplished film journalist" (Comic Buyer's Guide #1535), and the award-winning author of Horror Films of the 1980s (2007), The Rock and Roll Film Encyclopedia (2007) and Horror Films of the 1970s (2002), John Kenneth Muir, presents his blog on film, television and nostalgia, named one of the Top 100 Film Studies Blog on the Net.

Tuesday, September 06, 2016

Star Trek 50th Anniversary Week: "Balance of Terror"

Stardate 1709.1

As
Captain Kirk (William Shatner) officiates at a wedding of two young officers -- Lt.
Robert Tomlinson (Stephen Mines) and Ensign Angela Martine (Barbara Baldavin) --
he also monitors a dangerous situation developing in the neutral zone separating the
Federation from the Romulan Star Empire.

Specifically,
two Federation outposts monitoring the zone have gone suspiciously quiescent, and a third,
Outpost 4, reports coming under heavy attack by an invisible enemy.

The
Enterprise arrives too late to save Outpost 4, but catches sight of an enemy
vessel nearby; one with the ability to “cloak” and vanish from sight. Its weakness, however, is that it must become
visible to fire its deadly plasma weapon.

Although
the Earth-Romulan War is a century in the past, old race hatreds persist -- even aboard the Enterprise -- in the form of a bigoted helmsman, Stiles (Paul Comi). When the Enterprise learns that the Romulans
are an off-shoot of the Vulcan race, he immediately suspects that Mr. Spock
(Leonard Nimoy) is a spy, or a traitor.

Captain
Kirk soon recognizes the fact that he must destroy the invisible Romulan starship while it
is still traveling on the Federation side of the Neutral Zone, so no question can be
raised about who was the aggressor in this conflict.

Meanwhile aboard the Romulan vessel, a war-weary
commander (Mark Lenard) similarly realizes he must defeat the Enterprise if his
crew is ever again to see the stars of home.

I
must read like a broken record in reporting this assessment, but “Balance of
Terror” is another all-time classic Star Trek episode, and likely one of
the ten best stories of the entire series.

“Balance of Terror” overcomes its
obvious transplant of tropes from The Enemy Below (1957) -- a movie
about a destroyer battling a submarine in World War II -- to forge a powerful
statement about the futility of war.

This Trek episode also brilliantly portrays
its dueling commanders; men who are on opposite sides in a conflict, yet -- ironically -- share the same values. They are part of the universal brotherhood of soldiers, one might conclude.

Again, this depiction fits in well with the strong anti-war theme of Paul
Schneider’s teleplay.In a universe
without war, race hatred, territoriality and political gamesmanship, Kirk and
the Romulan Commander might be “friends,” since they are clearly two-of-a-kind. But in this universe, they are separated by their devotion to opposing governments and their martial philosophies.

Beyond
these matters, “Balance of Terror” establishes a gigantic chunk of Star Trek
continuity. This story introduces us to the Romulans, cloaking devices, the
concept of a space neutral zone, and more.

It creates, in fact, a whole lexicon and approach to battle strategy in
space. Virtually every Star Trek episode or movie
featuring two starships in tactical opposition owes something to the battle that
is (splendidly) depicted here, including the “grudging” respect Kirk and
opposite number afford one another in such combat scenarios (think Khan vs. Kirk;
Kruge vs. Kirk, or even Chang vs. Kirk).

It
is true, however, that the key genetic element of this episode is very clearly
The Enemy Below. In this film from the fifties,
a destroyer captain, Murrell (Robert Mitchum) tangles with a German U-Boat commanded
by Captain Stolberg (Curt Jurgens). In both cases, the so-called “enemy”
commander may be described as war-weary and lacks faith or trust in his command
structure back home (Nazis or the Praetor).

Secondly,
the closing gambit to the engagement in both cases involves an attempt to draw in an enemy by
appearing disabled. In The Enemy Below,Murrell orders fires to be started on the deck of the destroyer,
the Haynes, so that the vessel looks hopelessly damaged. In “Balance of Terror”
Kirk orders the Enterprise powered down, and lets her drift off-course, to
create the convincing illusion that she is dead in space.

Some viewers have also detected elements of Run Silent, Run Deep (1958) in “Balance
of Terror,” particularly in the scenes involving Stiles (a prejudiced crew man)
and the scene in which the Romulans dump their debris as a ruse.

If
one considers both sources as playing an important role, then “Balance of Terror” could actually be viewed
more as a pastiche -- an accumulation of submarine movie tropes -- than as mere
imitator. The transfer of the venue to the final frontier, however, makes the story appear original and fresh.

Even
while pinpointing its inspirations, one can see how “Balance of Terror” travels well beyond them to offer Star Trekkian philosophy and comment
on humanity.

Specifically, the episode features book-end scenes in the
Enterprise chapel.

In the first scene, Angela and Tomlinson are celebrating
life, preparing to be married (with Kirk officiating as chaplain).

In the final scene, Tomlinson is dead, and
Angela returns to the chapel in mourning.

Again, Kirk must act as a chaplain, but this time to comfort Angela, and
help her through her grief and mourning.

Importantly,
the episode features a remarkable turn of events in its denouement. In some fashion, Angela actually
comforts Kirk, telling him that she will be all right. This flipping of the roles is necessary, because it is clear that
Kirk feels terrible guilt over what has occurred; over a battle that he won,
but which ultimately cost crew-members their lives. In losing these crew-members, and wondering about the real purpose of the battle, in human terms, Kirk actually takes a step towards becoming more war-weary...just like the foe he just vanquished.

This
is very much the anti-war theme that I mentioned above.

What we see in “Balance
of Terror” is that young people, inevitably, are the ones who suffer during the prosecution of a
war.

Tomlinson had hopes and dreams, as did Angela. The future they imagined for themselves are
not to be. One may argue all day about the necessity of strength and resolve in
a war-situation like the one featured in “Balance of Terror.” But the simple fact is that the party is paid
for with the Enterprise’s dearest “blood,” to paraphrase Kirk in The Search for
Spock (1984).

Consider
that, as “Balance of Terror” aired in mid-December of 1966, 184,000+ U.S. servicemen were fighting in the
Vietnam War. Just a dozen days after the episode aired for the first time, another
382,000 American men were sent to fight it.

The reasons for that war, as is the case in “Balance of Terror,” are
matters of state and politics. Not letting an enemy sense weakness; not allowing an opposing
ideology get a foothold. These are all tactical decisions of a State that wishes to assert dominance and remain pre-eminent.

Through the Martine/Tomlinson subplot, Star Trek
makes plain that victory in war, while preferable to defeat, is not without
heavy human costs. And the young --- those
with the most to lose -- are the ones that bear that cost the most. Ironically, they are probably the ones who care least about politics, brinkmanship, and so forth.

A
second theme also comes through loud and clear in “Balance of Terror.”

Hate only leads to more war. Stiles is quite clearly living in the past, carrying the
hatreds of a war he was not even alive to see. Yet his family has passed that intense hate forward, like a family heirloom, so that he is able to contemplate the
idea of Romulans only as monsters and villains.

The episode balances Stiles' two-dimensional hatred of the enemy with the three-dimensional portrayal of the Romulan
commander. He is not a monster. He is not a cliche. He is a thoughtful person and an accomplished starship commander.

Mark Lenard is extraordinary in this role, and we sympathize with the character's plight. Like Captain Kirk, the Romulan Commander he is a creature
of duty, and a man ensconced in a hierarchy. He has given his career, his life,
to this hierarchy. And yet he knows too well the cost of war, and that there is
nothing ennobling about the endeavor.

Where Stiles is hungry to take the fight
to Romulans, the Romulan Commander sees war only as an ugly duty, a necessity
that he hates.He can game it all out, to the last move, and all he sees in war is death and more death.

In this case, one might assert Spock stands in
for a Japanese-American soldier in World War II, one who isn’t trusted by his peers not
because of his actions, but because of his appearance. That appearance is
enough to make some bigots worry that he sympathizes more with the enemy than
he does with his own countrymen. Stereotyping occurs when people fail to see the individual, and see only skin color, or pointed ears. That is how Stiles views Spock.

In “Balance
of Terror,” Stiles learns that he is wrong, after Spock saves his life in the
phaser control room. But again, the
overall message seems to be that war encourages racism, division, aggression, suspicion
and irrational emotions. We're supposed to not just want to defeat those who oppose us, but actually hate them and see them, somehow, as savages or sub-humans.

“Balance
of Terror” introduces us to the Romulans, who re-appear in the original series in “The Deadly Years”
and “The Enterprise Incident,” and who have been a
mainstay of the franchise ever since.

The
neutral zone concept has been exported not just to the Romulans, but the
Klingons as well, in productions such as The Wrath of Khan (1982). The cloaking device, similarly, has been
responsible for some of the most provocative Star Trek stories in
series history, and it too falls into the hands of the Klingons.

Even the
concept of a spaceship “Bird of Prey” re-appears.

But
perhaps the area wherein “Balance of Terror” succeeds most admirably and achieves its longevity is in its
depiction of one character: Kirk.

He is truly, a man alone, making decisions
that could cost lives, and plunge the galaxy into a bloody war. Kirk must carry that tremendous weight on his shoulders,
and “Balance of Terror” shows him agonizing over it.

McCoy’s advice to him is good: don’t destroy
the one named Kirk. In other words, Kirk must not allow himself to be overcome by the gravity of the situation, or the
hypothetical outcomes of each and every choice. He must function -- and function at his highest ability -- no matter the cost.

Kirk
also grows as a character, intriguingly, because of the episode’s three-dimensional depiction of
the Romulan. The Commander gets to voice some things that a “hero” can’t, but
which Kirk must nonetheless feel as the commanding officer of a starship. This "enemy" gets to showcase the same characteristics (such as devotion to duty), but simultaneously transmits as older, and more war-weary than his counterpart. He may not be a precise mirror for Kirk, but
a mirror for what Kirk could very well become in twenty years.

“Balance of Terror” -- an anti-war story -- is
tense and suspenseful throughout its run. Although it showcases the cost of
war, at the same time it creates a whole “universe” of believable space
combat "rules."

For example, the episode showcases how
starship commanders can use the environment of nearby space (like passing comets) to
seek strategic advantage, for instance, and is very much a cat-and-mouse kind
of hunt.

Each commander comes up with dynamic resolutions as they try to save their ship and carry the day.Kirk’s ship plays dead, for example, and the
Romulan ship launches debris (with a nuclear device in it) to trap the
Enterprise. This brand of space strategy is a core conceit of all generations of Star Trek.

4 comments:

John valid review of "Balance Of Terror" which is an excellent Star Trek episode. The final scene with Kirk attempting to comfort Ensign Angela Martine (Barbara Baldavin) is beautifully filmed and acted right down to the camera following Kirk out of the chapel walking a man alone among the crew in the corridors. Beyond Khan vs. Kirk; Kruge vs. Kirk, or even Chang vs. Kirk, I have always felt that this episode is the template for a great Star Trek film that has not been made, yet. We only got a sample of this in Wrath of Khan and Undiscovered Country.

About the only thing I'd add is the idea that the Romulan Commander death is doubly tragic. Not just because an essentially good man dies, but because he is lost to his own race, who needs more like him.

About John

award-winning author of 27 books including Horror Films FAQ (2013), Horror Films of the 1990s (2011), Horror Films of the 1980s (2007), TV Year (2007), The Rock and Roll Film Encyclopedia (2007), Mercy in Her Eyes: The Films of Mira Nair (2006),, Best in Show: The Films of Christopher Guest and Company (2004), The Unseen Force: The Films of Sam Raimi (2004), An Askew View: The Films of Kevin Smith (2002), The Encyclopedia of Superheroes on Film & Television (2004), Exploring Space:1999 (1997), An Analytical Guide to TV's Battlestar Galactica (1998), Terror Television (2001), Space:1999 - The Forsaken (2003) and Horror Films of the 1970s (2002).

Follow by Email

What the Critics Say...

"...some of the best writing about the genre has been done by John Kenneth Muir. I am particularly grateful to him for the time and attention he's paid to things others have overlooked, under-appreciated and often written off. His is a fan's perspective first, but with a critic's eye to theme and underscore, to influence and pastiche..." - Chris Carter, creator of The X-Files, in the foreword to Horror Films FAQ (October 2013).

"Hands down, John Kenneth Muir is one of the finest critics and writers working today. His deep analysis of contemporary American culture is always illuminating and insightful. John's film writing and criticism is outstanding and a great place to start for any budding writer, but one should also examine his work on comic books, TV, and music. His weighty catalog of books and essays combined with his significant blog production places him at the top of pop culture writers. Johns work is essential in understanding the centrality of culture in modern society." - Professor Bob Batchelor, cultural historian and Executive Director of the James Pedas Communication Center at Thiel College (2014).

"...an independent film scholar, [Muir] explains film studies concepts in a language that is reader-friendly and engaging..." (The Hindu, 2007)"...Muir's genius lies in his giving context to the films..." (Choice, 2007)